Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 11/12/2016 in all areas

  1. 20 points
    I'm Steve Cox, a member of the Utimaker Community. I'm an experienced engineer having spent many years in the automotive industry but I'm now focussed on the world of 3D technologies, specifically 3D product design and 3DPprinting. I'm an Autodesk Certified Instructor for Fusion 360, so many of the images in this post are taken from that design software but this post is not specific to that software but is about designing for 3D Printing and Additive Manufacturing. This is a first of a series of blog posts in this area that will be focussing on how engineering is interacting with the latest 3D technologies. Additive Manufacturing (AM) and 3D Printing (3DP) - whilst the way they produce an object from nowhere can often seem like modern-day magic, the truth is that in many ways they are no different to any other way of making things. Every method that we use to manufacture things has it’s own rules that we need to consider when designing. These rules are known as DFM – Design For Manufacture. This approach takes into account the pros and cons of the chosen manufacturing method to produce a design that can be made repeatably, reliably and to meet the intended function and life expectancy of the product. This way of thinking when applied to AM (or 3DP) is now becoming known as DfAM, or Design for Additive Manufacture. In reality there are two aspects of DfAM, the first we will deal with in this post where we will concentrate on the use of DfAM applied to detail features of the design to ensure manufacturability. The second aspect is using DfAM at the conceptual design to realise some of the unique capabilities that AM has to offer, and that will be covered in a later article. The rules of DfAM tend to be slightly different for each type of AM/3DP technology. Here we will be assuming that we are using Fused Deposition Modelling (FDM) 3DP but, for instance, in metal AM residual stresses build up in the part during manufacturing due to the high local energies applied by the laser or electron beam. These have to be taken into consideration if warping and possible early-life failure are to be avoided. So, in metal AM, the use of DfAM can involve designing out thick sections where heat build-up can be greatest. This is seldom a significant issue in FDM 3D printing. Two of the main DfAM considerations in FDM 3D printing are layer orientation and overhangs which we will take a closer look at here. Layer orientation When a detail design is being prepared for manufacture one of the first things to consider is the loads that will be applied to it, and 3D printing is no different. There can be potential weaknesses in 3D prints in the “welded” joints that exist between every layer which provide multiple potential crack propagation opportunities. So at the detail design stage the loading direction may need to be taken into account, which can in turn lead to a decision being made on the print direction to be used very early on and that will then set the tone for the rest of the design. In this particular case the stress analysis in Fusion 360 on a loaded side wall of a design shows that the peak stress occurs on the inside face of that wall near to it’s base which, if we were to print it in this orientation, will coincide with the end of a layer and hence one of these potential crack propagation sites : Which can lead to this : The better way of 3D printing this design to withstand this loading condition would be to orientate the printing direction by 90 degrees to ensure that the load is being applied along the layer lines rather than across them. The strength of a part with this layer orientation will be many times greater under the loading condition described previously, though the amount is difficult to objectively state since simulation software taking into account the layer construction of AM is still an emerging area of activity. So this is a DfAM consideration to think about at the very start of your design - what are the main load bearing directions and is it possible to optimise the design to ensure that the way that you will make the part which does not result in loads being applied across a layer? This is the single most effective step that you can take, but it may not always be possible to do that, in which case you need to employ mitigation factors into your design. The usual best practice in any design is, where possible, to add a fillet (or radius) at the base of the wall to counteract these high stresses. This reduces the local stress moves the higher stress point further up the side wall and is an optimal way of adding strength with the addition of minimal material. However, in AM/3DP it is often a better option to use an angled face rather than a curved face to achieve the same effect The reason for this different approach is that the "staircase" of layers in more uniform in the case of the angled face, whilst with a fillet radius the smooth blend into the base results in a longer first layer step which reduces it's effectiveness. So this is another aspect of DfAM where strategies used for other methods of manufacture may need to be subtly modified to make them most effective when using this particular method Overhangs Once the print direction has been selected then the design of overhangs, and preferably the elimination of as many of these as possible, can be addressed. Fewer overhangs means less requirement for support which leads to a more efficient print time, lower material usage and reduced post processing time for removal of supports This is the most obvious way to eliminate an overhanging feature : Things like this are simplistic and often easy to spot, but you may find that your design is more complex than this and there is a tendency to design from experience with traditional manufacturing methods and put in features that aren’t good for AM almost without thinking. For instance in this example of a flanged coupling the features with blind tapped holes for the connection have been designed with a feature that would cause no problem for a moulding process but produce an overhanging area for 3D printing (highlighted in red when viewed in Cura) With some re-examination it was possible to re-imagine these features like this which result in no overhang and hence no support. Rather than fill this post with lots of examples of individual examples of this kind of comparison my recommendation when engaging with DfAM is to regularly check your design in the slicing software as your design develops, looking for those overhanging areas using an inspection tool that highlights those areas, or looking through the layer stack for areas that look difficult to print. The layer stack should be something that’s looked at before every print as a matter of course and is also a great way of spotting issues at the design stage that you may be easily able to address. In Fusion 360 the ability to go from the design workspace to the slicer software (such as Cura) to check for printability can be done with a single click of a button, and without the need for any time-consuming exporting and subsequent importing of .stl files. This can make the iterative process of Design → Check → Modify → Recheck much quicker, and result in a faster convergence to an efficient design for additive manufacture The approaches we have looked at here are when DfAM is applied at the detail design stage and looks to address, and deal with, the drawbacks of 3DP/AM. In a future post we will look at applying DfAM at the conceptual design stage where the advantages that AM has to offer can really become very valuable. This approach can be much more powerful and result in designs that really do provide unique and extremely effective solutions that would have been unthinkable just a few years ago.
  2. 19 points

    Version 1.0.0

    241 downloads

    Here is my full size Velociraptor skeleton. Juste made for the challenge. Lenght: ~180cm Sculpted with Zbrush. Total printing time: ~392h. Printer: Ultimaker2+ Filament: PLA Speed: 30mm/s - 50mm/s Nozzle: 0,4mm Layers: 0,15mm Painting : acrylic paint (spray and brushe)
  3. 19 points
    Especially for you, here's the post again, so you can give it a second like: Yay, picking is working:
  4. 19 points
    Hi to all The 2016 year had inspired some of us in 3D field, we are always looking to improve our jobs and our equipement. For a long time I wanted to print with ultra-flexible filament without meeting all the difficulties due to the bowden tube on the one hand and the disadvantages of weight and power of the direct drive with the stepper motor on the head of printing on the other hand The flexible shaft is an interesting solution but also has some disadvantages and requires a significant addition of adjustments in a specific software to remove them. I tried to find a compromise between these 3 systems, here are the results Extrusion in direct with the usual stepper motor and using the components of the original extruder or those of the upgrade. The system is quite simple by replacing the Bowden tube by a straight and rigid square shaft between the stepper motor and the feeder, the latter 2 being installed on pivot points to be able to follow freely the X/Y displacements. There is little added weight, +/- 10 grs more on the print head, it's why it is called by Neotko " Zero Gravity Direct Drive ", thanks to him for that and also for giving some good ideas There is absolutely no play in operation, extrusion and retraction have become very accurate by having the full torque power. Printing with very flexible filament has become almost as easy and fast as with the PLA My average retraction setting distance down to 1.5mm (1 to 2mm maxi) Now my average print speed is 60mm / s The other settings remain in accordance with the usual settings depending on the filament used. I improved the ringing by lowering the acceleration values ??and the X / Y jerk, (2500/15 UM2 extended) Depth of 150 hours of test performed with different filament types without encountering problems, the videos shows tests of a hobby car tire wich is printed with the 2.85mm Recreus Fila Flex A82 Shore at 50mm/s print speed and 2mm/30mm/s retractation settings. the Bondtech feeder parts are used here for the 2 print heads, a system with the UM stock knurled wheel is in preparation; some other works future UM stock feeder parts uses in a customized" I Roberti" feeder system
  5. 17 points
  6. 15 points
    Hey guys, I would like to share a lever action dual extrusion solution I came up with for Ultimaker 2+. The approach is based on the great effort everyone put into Mark2 and Ultimaker 3. The print head holds two hot ends, which are originally to be installed on standard UM2 head for 1.75 filament. The right nozzle move up and down for nozzle swapping. This compact dual print head can achieve single extrusion print area of 220x223x205, and dual extrusion print area of 202x223x200. Video clips: Files and instructions available at: https://github.com/yyh1002/DXU Credits: Lever lifting mechanism is inspired by Ultimaker 3. The firmware is modified based on Mark2 version of Tinkergnome firmware by @tinkergnome. CURA profiles are modified based on the Mark2 profiles by @tinkergnome and @foehnsturm. Used Mark2Tweaks plugin for CURA by Krys Lawrence.
  7. 13 points
    This is a project by a group of community members which was also involved in the Mark2 dual extrusion upgrade. More precisely, it's me coming up with an outside the box approach / weird idea for a certain unresolved problem. Smart people like @gr5, @Anders Olsson, @Dim3nsioneer, @rooiejoris throwing in ideas and @tinkergnome who implants the stuff into firmware. My impression of the current state of development when I started this was as follows. There have been filament monitor projects since the beginning of reprap. Only very few made it to some kind of product state, like the one by Aaron Tunell. Manufacturers like Prusa and others recently introduced some kind of filament monitors, with mixed success / reliability issues. The Duet3D guys set their hardware research (laser-based and rotating) on hold because they were experiencing inaccuracies of +/-20%. Well and then there was Ultimaker ... until yesterday with the S5 All these efforts have been or still are struggling to fulfill the most important objective: NO FALSE ALERTS. Otherwise any filament sensor would quickly render itself useless. What we want to achieve Objectives, the obvious part: zero false alerts detect filament runout ("nothing there") detect filament grinding ("nothing/very little moves") Objectives, the challenging part: detect first layer issues (see video below) detect when real flow leaves a certain safe process window and starts to compromise part quality (first, inter layer adhesion will suffer, then classical under extrusion will be visible) and try to counteract, that's where the real fun starts ... Current state of development We chose an encoder and there's a reliably working prototype for an easy to attach external flow sensor, mounted to the entry side of the feeder. Resolution is in the range of 0.015 mm. It's integrated in Tinkerware with a dedicated menu and we (well, he) implemented a gcode command: M591 T0 S1 E0.5000 L0.01695 R35:130 A0.3 P100.00 I leave the parameter interpretation as a little quiz here. Right now I'm working on a modified design which, besides the encoder, doesn't need some parts which cannot be printed and are in the +30€ range to have them manufactured. But most likely some parts will still not be FFF printable. How can I get this? First give us some more time to test and evaluate. If everything works like intended we might proceed like with the Mark2 project. If we should offer this as a product I'd expect a price tag between 70-100 €. And the UM3? That's the BIG question. Like @Daid recently stated their main market is already different. And indeed, has anyone seen any kind of (hardware) upgrade for the UM3 so far? Feeders are the same, mechanically our sensor fits. Electronics, not sure. Ultimaker originally wanted to use a serial interface on the UM3. For the UM2+ we simply connect the sensor's quadrature output signal to free I/O pins, there are enough left (4) for two sensors for a Mark2 dual extrusion UM2. Ultimaker won't do anything to support a sensor on the UM3. Anyway, if a large number of UM3 users would show interest, they might at least not impede a development ...
  8. 13 points
  9. 13 points
    Recently I started experimenting with cutting out vinyl stickers with my Ultimaker 2 and figured I'd share my method to save time for others if they want to do the same thing. Using a 3D printer to do this is nothing new, it has been done plenty of times before. But this is how I did it. Get comfortable, this is going to take a while. I've tried to make it as easy as possible to do but be prepared to do some tweaking and experimenting along the way. What you need (if you want the software to be free): - A holder and knives. The one I got was this: "15pcs 30°/45°/60° Degree For Roland Cutting Plotter Vinyl Cutter BladeHolder" http://r.ebay.com/STTdJx - A printed holder (see zip) - Some vinyl: Available from arts and craft stores, ebay, sign makers etc. I got a random piece from Ebay to try. - Vinyl transfer tape (or in my case, some random blue painters tape from tesa I had in the junk drawer that worked well) - Inkscape to create your design: https://inkscape.org/en/ - dxf2gcode: https://sourceforge.net/projects/dxf2gcode/ - Better Better DXF Output for Inkscape: http://tim.cexx.org/?p=590 - Pronterface/Printrun: https://github.com/kliment/Printrun A slightly modified version of the DXF exporter and dxf2gcode with my current settings are included in this zip: http://www.theintarweb.net/ultimaker/vinyl/um2_vinyl_cutter.zip Setting up your hardware Print out the little mount that is included in the zip. It was made quick and dirty, but it works well enough. Attach it to the head using the screws that hold the fan shroud in place. Install a knife into the holder and adjust the amount it sticks out so that it just barely cuts through your vinyl, but not through the paper backing. It's important to get this distance right or you will either not cut enough, which means you can't remove the excess vinyl, or you'll cut too deep and ruin your knife (good thing the knock-offs are cheap ). As you can see in the image, we're talking a tiny amount that the knife is sticking out. Try the setting on a piece of vinyl by pushing the holder up against the vinyl and dragging the knife in a circle. Try peeling the circle out. It will be obvious if you're cutting too deep or not deep enough. Adjust accordingly. I also recommend using some fine sandpaper to polish off any sharp edges on the front of the knife holder as it will be dragged across the vinyl. Push the holder into the mount in your printer and use a short M3 screw to secure it in place. Install Pronterface and connect your printer to your computer via USB. Set your baud rate to 250000. Choose the correct port (you can find that in the Device Manger in Windows under the "Ports" section) or just pick one from the list in Pronterface and try connecting until you find the right one. The printer will go *clunk* and the lights will go out temporarily, this is normal. You now have full control over your printer. We will use this program to figure out the correct z-distance for your installed knife. Start by clicking on the homing button (the small house) to home all axes on the printer. Next, move the head into a position where you can get a good view of it in relation to the glass. I like to put it in the middle of the bed, slightly towards the front. You do this with the large circle area of Pronterface. Click the different quarter circles to move the head in increments of 0.1, 1 or 10mm in X and Y. Now it's time to raise the bed. In the lower right corner of Pronterface there's a small field where you can put in GCode to be sent to the printer. Type in "G0 Z20" and hit enter. The bed will now move up and stop 20mm from the tip of your nozzle. Now use the buttons next to the quarter circles to raise the bed further until the tip of the blade is just barely in contact with the glass. Type in "M114" into the little box and hit enter. The printer will now give you the current Z-height (in my case it's 1.7mm). Write this number down. Optionally you can also print out "um2_bed.pdf" from the zip and put it underneath the glass. It makes it easier to position the vinyl pieces. Setting up and using the software Start by downloading and installing Inkscape. After the installation is done, unzip the contents of "b2_dxf_output.zip" directly into your "[installation directory of inkscape]/share/extensions" folder. You will be asked to overwrite "simpletransform.py", this is normal. Unzip "exe.win32-3.4.zip" to a place of your choosing. I've included a file called "decal_helper.svg" in the zip. You can use this file as a base to make things easier to position. Make sure that any shapes you draw are not on the "IGNORE:HELPER" layer. That layer will be ignored by dxf2gcode. Also make sure the design is within the red outline. When you're done with your design go to File->Save a copy. Under "Save as type" select "Better Better DXF Output (*.DXF)", this is the extension you installed earlier. If things go according to plan this will save your file as a DXF that dxf2gcode likes (it chokes on the default exporter that is built in by default in Inkscape). Now open up dxf2gcode and go to Options->Configuration. You probably want to start by changing the two paths shown on the top right as you will not have those folders on your system. It's not strictly necessary to change it, but it makes things less of a hassle when importing and saving files. Next, go to the "Machine config" section and put in the value you wrote down earlier in the "Final mill depth" box. Yes, this means that the gcode produced will cause the printer to raise the glass so that it's almost touching the blade when cutting. BUT, we set the blade in the holder so that it only peaks out enough to cut the vinyl, so as long as you have vinyl under the holder, the "springiness" of the gantry will let holder move up ever so slightly and the knife will cut to the perfect depth. Hit "Apply" and close the settings. Now it's time to load the dxf-file you created via File->Open. It may take a little while for the program to process your file. When it's done you'll get a warning about some elements being too short, just hit OK. You should hopefully be looking at something like this now. In this screenshot I've zoomed in on a corner of a path to show the drag knife compensation that dxf2gcode does. This is one of the reasons I picked this program, the other being that it's free. As a last check, make sure that "Z final mill depth" matches your value when clicking on one of the shapes. Now it's time to export the file via Export -> Optimize and Export Shapes. We're almost done. Cut out a piece of vinyl and attach it to your bed. This is where the guide lines in my Inkscape helper-file and the printout comes in handy. I like to put a piece of tape on all sides of the vinyl to make sure it stays firmly planted to the bed. You can probably get away with less, but tape is cheap. Switch back to Pronterface and open the file you just created. Finally, it's time to try your first cut. If your printer has been turned off since you last used Pronterface, remember to home the machine first with the little house button. Hit the Print button and keep a finger on the power button of your printer in case something goes horribly wrong. If all goes well you should now have a freshly cut piece of vinyl ready to clean up and get ready for application. Remove all the excess and then apply some vinyl transfer tape. Use something like a credit card to really push the tape onto the vinyl to make sure it sticks properly. If your design is a bunch of small shapes (text for example), I recommend putting the transfer tape on right away, scrub it down really well and then carefully peel it off, this will lift the letters from the backing (with some patience and a helping hand from tweezers/scalpel). I found this to be a lot easier than trying to pull the excess away from around the text. Did you make it all the way down here? Sweet!
  10. 12 points
    Mark2 is an asymmetrical multi-extrusion upgrade for the Ultimaker 2, based on Foehnsturm's magnetic tool changer. It offers some unique features compared to conventional approaches. Keep it smart and simple The Mark2 upgrade doesn't require to modify or even disassemble the well-working single extrusion setup. Instead it adds a detachable second extruder. This leaves you with several benefits. Powerful - print quality on par with eg. the UM3 or BCN3D Sigma Flexible - use whatever you want: Olsson ruby, 3Dsolex block / nozzles, ... Cost-efficient - all you need is a second drive train, some magnets and screws Simple - all tried-and tested standard components Smart - Z-offset managed by firmware, calibration wizards Open & scalable - a non-extrusion tool head, a 3rd extruder ... all possible Mark2 is an Ultimaker community project, we don't offer a complete kit but we can help you out with a package, including all the parts you need, besides the second drive train. See it live Probably the best way to get an impression of the usability and print quality is to watch a few videos. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLeNzDYMnqAqIeZHWU9iOWnj_2OaemupQG Full Cura 2.5 integration Mark2 comes with a set of Cura definition files and can be added as a pre-configured printer. Tried and tested Mark2 setups have been printing for more than 5.000 hrs now, which equals more than 500.000 tool changes. Beta-testers and co-developers include well-known guys here like Tinkergnome, Ultiarjan and many more. The Mark2 website ultimaker-mark2.com is the place where you find all the information you need for doing this upgrade. ... and The Mark2 Dual Extrusion Project Contest is still running.
  11. 12 points
    How can the very latest, cutting-edge design software combine with a 5,000 year old manufacturing technique to deliver outstanding weight reduction opportunities? Designing for light-weight parts is becoming more important, and I’m a firm believer in the need to produce lighter weight, less over-engineered parts for the future. This is for sustainability reasons because we need to be using less raw materials and, in things like transportation, it impacts upon the energy usage of the product during it’s service life. Lighter products mean less fuel to move them around, which can make our fossil fuel reserves go further, or make more efficient use of the renewable energies that we’re now beginning to adopt. Generative Design (GD) is the very latest design software released by Autodesk and is now included in Fusion 360, which is at the heart of their "Future of Making Things" strategy for Design and Manufacturing. It changes the way we design things and can deliver very efficient designs that deliver structural performance with optimised use of material. The aerospace industry is expected to be one of the early adopters of this technology because in that industry the cost and environmental savings from improved fuel efficiency carry the greatest rewards. Also, I see interest from the automotive industry for the same fuel efficiency reasons, but in the long term the drive for lighter weight parts could benefit many industries, even those outside of transportation. Another example of the benefits of lighter weight alongside reduced material usage is that shipping costs for parts reduce as their weight reduces, which can therefore also deliver cost efficiencies. GD is targeted initially at metal parts where the biggest opportunity for light-weighting exists. The complex forms it generates though often means that parts conceived in this way cannot be made with conventional manufacturing routes. They therefore need to use Additive Manufacturing (AM) techniques to produce them. The route of using high energy, laser-based AM to do this comes with associated high costs because of the specialised set-up knowledge required together with expensive processing, and post processing, to deliver a quality-assured part. This project explores the possibility of a more cost-effective route to a metal GD part which, even though at this stage may be just used for a small quantity of evaluation prototypes, can act as an enabler for understanding the potential that GD has to offer. This is the baseline design for this project. It is an aluminium bracket design similar to those used in aerospace applications to mount control surfaces, and in this form has not been optimised for weight. This design would weigh 383 grams in the intended material, aluminium A356. After processing this through Generative Design in Fusion 360 it’s time to review and evaluate the many alternative design options presented and decide upon the design that is considered the most appropriate taking into the other factors that have an influence on design selection such as manufacturability, aesthetics etc. This was the design option chosen for this part and Fusion 360 was used to create the final version of the model. The bio-mimicry that’s evident in most of the designs created by GD is interesting to see, in this case the design of the part can be seen as essentially a swept I-beam (which engineers, especially those in construction, are taught is a strong section), but with tendon-like attachments back to the mounting points to carry the tensile loading that’s created by the applied loading conditions What GD does is to turn the standard design workflow that we’re familiar with on it’s head. Traditionally we design a part and then stress test it virtually to determine if it fulfils the required structural performance. Any failures seen during this process require an iterative loop back to the design to correct them. With GD the stress analysis is a core part of the design synthesis, and happens as the part design iterates, which means that the output at the end should meet the requirements of the intended loading requirements. The software is searching for an optimal solution where the stress is ideally evenly distributed across the part as can be seen above. To prove that everything is good with the finalised design this part has then been virtually tested again in Fusion 360 to confirm that the original loading requirements are still met So we've created our lightweight part design, and maybe now we need to produce that in aluminium A356 to do some physical testing, but don’t want the expense of using a metal AM process. What follows is a way of achieving this where FDM 3D printing can play a role as an “enabler” to help create the final parts in conjunction with a very old (if not ancient) manufacturing technique called investment casting. This technique is 5,000 years old according to Wikipedia. The company involved with casting this project is Sylatech who have been using Ultimaker 3D printers as part of their process for investment casting of prototype parts Sylatech took the .stl file of this model and used it to create a 3D print of the part on an Ultimaker 3 in PLA. This PLA part was then used as the pattern in the investment casting process where it is submerged in plaster under vacuum conditions to ensure that all air is excluded from the mould and creates an accurate reproduction of the surfaces of the part. The picture below shows a display box which demonstrates the set up of the 3D printed parts partially encased in plaster. Once the plaster has hardened the casting box is put into a furnace at very high temperature in order to burn out the PLA, leaving behind a cavity into which molten aluminium can be cast. After solidification of the metal, and cooling of the mould, the plaster is broken away from the parts, and then they can be quickly and easily removed from the material feed gate resulting in these aluminium A356 versions of the PLA original. The final part weighs 122 grams which is a weight saving of 68% over the original baseline part, which shows the potential that GD has to make significant reductions in weight and material usage. Using this method we now we have an excellent quality physical part made very quickly in the final intended material in order to commence some physical testing.This is a different route to get to that physical test part in metal at a fraction of the cost of having it metal additively manufactured. It also shows how a brand new, cutting edge piece of software that only became available in May 2018 can combine with FDM 3D printing (which many people still see as a new technology even though it’s been around for over 20 years) and a 5,000 year old manufacturing technique to deliver potentially huge benefits in weight and material usage. Using the investment casting route in this case study is why I chose the title for this article, and shows that we can effectively go “Back To (Deliver) The Future”. Do you see the need for lighter weight parts in what you do, and can you see the potential benefits of using Generative Design and this method of producing metal parts? I'd welcome comments, suggestions, and discussion about any aspects of the above article, the next steps that I'm looking at are how this process could scale up to batch production of the parts using 3D printing techniques that could support low volume production quantities
  12. 12 points
    A small update, we are doing a lot (A LOT) of testing to optimize every single part, from print time to assembly to tutorial videos. Is quite a lot of work, but so far we are on a really good point print quality. Ofc like any beta testing we found stuff to improve. Right now we have 3 versions and we are testing every single part as much as we can. Basically from the first design to the new we had 5 versions, and atm the last 3 versions are under stress testing. Also please, if someone has a REALLY difficult print, something that requieres finesse and precision, I would like to print it and test it to see if there's any weak point. Ofc if someone want to share it with me and keep the files form being public that's ok too. I would really like have an architecture file or something really challenging apart of voronoi and very thin walls. Also after talking to @bondtech and we just got 2 ideas that could be really interesting for the guys like us that want as much precision as possible from the extrusion, up to the decimal points of estep calibration for each kind of filament. Very interesting stuff, we will publish more when we have more tests of this ideas.
  13. 12 points
    successful proof of concept !! the first print is done...
  14. 11 points
    I'm working on a plugin that changes the new GUI in Cura to be more settings-centric by adding back the concept of a sidebar. If you can't get used to the floating panels in the new GUI, there will soon be a plugin for you. While rearranging things into the sidebar, I am also taking the chance to rearrange some other bits: move X-ray from the Preview tab to the Prepare tab in my opinion it makes more sense to detect/show errors *before* slicing reunite the Open button with the Toolbar Fitts's law suggests keeping distances between small items smaller; I just dislike having UI elements in all corners of the UI. add the same menu and sidebar between Prepare and Preview so things don't jump around The plugin is currently in the state of a proof-of-concept; there is currently no way to switch between the Recommended and Custom sidebar, and there is no way to change the materials/printcores in the sidebar. When all standard functionality is in its new place I'll post a prerelease here before publishing the plugin to the Marketplace. If you can't wait, you can check out the code here: https://github.com/fieldOfView/SidebarGUIPlugin Things I'm considering: integrate the action panel into the sidebar move job name into sidebar move standard view items into view options/legend area The plugin is a spiritual successor to the Compact Prepare Stage plugin, though it was written from scratch with a different end-goal in mind. That plugin will not be developed further. Update: a beta is available below:https://community.ultimaker.com/topic/26014-sidebar-gui-for-cura-40/?do=findComment&comment=229800
  15. 11 points
    Here’s my new printer cabinets to keep noise in my office down and to store them in a neat & tidy way. Made by my favorite furniture maker. PSU, cables, Raspberry Pi with OctoPrint are stowed in the drawers underneath the printers. The printers can slide out for filament change or other maintenance. The doors have gaskets so the noise can’t escape.
  16. 11 points
    I MADE A BETTER AND INTERACTIVE GRAPHS HERE: http://gr5.org/mat/ Okay well this post will grow when I add temperature properties. I've been thinking about posting this for a few years. Here is a graph showing some mechanical properties of some common filaments. Please read explanation as this is a complicated subject. Click to zoom in on chart (click 3 times - first click zooms, second click jumps to actual image, third click zooms into that). Higher up is stronger. Farther to the right is stiffer (not steel). Both axes are logarithmic. Most data is published by various manufacturers. I have personally verified a few of these numbers with my own equipment. VERTICAL AXIS So the vertical axis is tensile strength. It's measured by pulling on a cylinder of material from each end until it breaks. Divide the force by the cross sectional area and you get the strength in psi (pounds per square inch) or MPa (mega pascals) for those who prefer metric (like me). Anyway this is kind of complicated because the materials towards the left are quite stretchy and long before their breaking point the parts are damaged. The point where it won't bounce back is the yield strength but I choose the ultimate aka breaking strength. Or whichever was higher (some materials actually start to get weaker again - like steel. Or PLA). Now the weakest material shown, PP is actually showing the yield strength - it is actually much stronger than you would think so this is unfair. But the machine that UM used to test PP wasn't long enough to test this value (the part never broke). HORIZONTAL AXIS This is the tensile young's modulus wherever possible (sometimes it's the flexural modulus which is close enough). This is tricky and complicated but for the most part indicates how stretchy/flexible a material is. So ninjaflex on the left edge has very similar flexibility to a rubber band. Most nylons (except shapeways) are much more flexible than PLA or ABS and this makes them very tough. Materials to the upper left will be tough as hell. In fact anything to the left of and including "nylon UM" can probably be driven over by a car and come out just fine afterwards. Or a tank. Or you can throw it against a brick wall with full strength or hit it with a hammer. Most of those materials in most shapes can handle it. Tough. Materials to the lower right are more likely brittle (hence glass is the most brittle). XT is probably somewhat brittle among filaments (I've never tried it). Materials to the right tend to be hard. The hardness scale and the modulus are closely intertwined. Things to the right are harder, to the left are softer. Specific Materials The table that created the graphs here is at the bottom of this post. Red materials above are for comparison and are not filaments. ABS is shown in green above - this shows how different people testing the same material get different results. Most of these tests (maybe all) were done on printed parts which will be a bit down and to the left of injection molded parts. Two different companies tested Taulman Nylon 645. With professional equipment and also got different values hence the two data points. UM=Ultimaker in the chart. XT is colorfabb. POMC is delrin. I'm very skeptical about nylforce CF specs. If someone wants to send me some I'll print and test it with my stress/strain machine. In the graph above there are a few points to keep in mind. Materials with low softening temp are the easiest to print because they don't warp much in the temperature range from this temperature to room temp. It's only about 30C difference. As you move to the right the yellow group of materials is a little harder - parts are more likely to warp off the bed so you need to learn some tricks. Maybe. They really aren't much worse. The orange area with ABS and other materials are tricky now for a few reasons - they don't stick as well to the bed, you are now getting into materials with layer adhesion issues so you need to lower the fans, the bed takes much longer to heat up - you really need to enclose the printer to raise air temp to around 35C to get decent quality. The red group needs nozzles that can go over 300C (no teflon please!) and print beds that can go to 150C and ambient air in the printer at 80C. So this requires special equipment. Also as you move to the right your materials can handle working environments of higher temperature. The green materials can't handle a car with windows rolled up on a hot sunny day (neither can a human for that matter). The yellow materials can handle this but can't handle boiling water. The orange materials can handle boiling water. SOFTENING TEMP (horizontal axis) In the graph above the horizontal axis is a mythical characteristic called "softening temp". For many of these materials in the green and yellow area I have tested them myself personally by sticking them in hot water. Above a certain temp they can be easily bent and when they cool a few degrees they stay in the new shape. That's what I call the softening temp but in reality this value came from HDT (heat deflection temp) or glass temp in other cases or functional temperature in other cases. It's a mixed bag. So it's very approximate! Normally you want the heated bed at a temperature a bit above this temperature such that the material is soft enough to flex a little and spread out the warping forces. PRINTING TEMP (vertical axis) Also somewhat arbitrary as some materials like PLA have a wide range of printing temps. Also variation in heater block design and variations in nozzle length, filament diameter, airflow touching nozzle, and more - affect what this temp should be. But it is a good place to start. Mostly I'm just showing that the red materials need special equipment to print them. The green, yellow, and orange materials can all mostly be printed by most printers no problem. In table below, take all values with a grain of salt. Especially temperatures. For tensile modulus notes read "horizontal axis" paragraph far above. For tensile strength read "vertical axis" far above. For softening temp - please read "softening temp" paragraph above. I've already fixed several mistakes in the table below but ONLY on the website - please go my website for better data! gr5 materials
  17. 11 points
    Hello! Je reviens par ici avec un nouveau montage: Utilisation de PLA avec une buse de 0,4. Le squelette a une envergure de 1m60 ailes déployées. Pour s'imaginer, le crâne du bout du bec au bout de la crête fait 40cm (je l'ai imprimé en 3 parties), ce qui m'a un peu fait suer pour l'assemblage (peur que le poids fasse pencher l'ensemble ). Mais au final ça a été. Je ne saurais pas vraiment dire le temps total d'impression parce que ça fait un petit moment que ça a été fait. Mais bon, le temps de peindre, faire son petit coin photo etc etc....
  18. 10 points
    I was asked to sum up some facts about the alternative "tinker" firmware. Here are the basics and the main links to start with it: What is the "Tinker-Firmware"? It's an alternative firmware for machines of the Ultimaker 2 series. The main development was made by me in my spare time. It's open source, based on the standard firmware from Ultimaker, but driven by the community. One of the benefits is that special requirements can potentially be adapted faster. At least there's a good chance that someone 'jumps on the bandwagon' and implements it. The tinker firmware does not work on an Ultimaker Original, but @amedee made an excellent job and offers a free online firmware compiler for these machines: https://bultimaker.bulles.eu/ If you want to learn more about firmware in general (what it does and how it works), you find more information on the homepage of the Marlin Firmware: http://www.marlinfw.org/ What are the differences to the standard firmware? Basically - the user interface. Most of the "driving logic" under the hood is untouched and derived from the Ultimaker standard firmware (and finally from the Marlin firmware). The menu structure of the tinker firmware is intended to support the needs of advanced users and tinkerers. In the beginning I developed it only to fulfil my personal interests, but it began to grow after I shared the result with the community. The initial intention was easier access to the 'tune' options during printing. In addition: more preferences are configurable directly on the printer. For example: the beep on key-press and the printing area can be changed without the need to re-compile. There is also a 'sleep timer' that switches the light off after a configurable period of time. It's unlikely that something on your printer gets damaged by this firmware, but there's no guarantee. You are using it on your own risk. If necessary, you can always re-install former versions (or the standard firmware) with Cura. After a subsequent factory reset all behaves like before. How to get it? At first: be aware that I don't own all printer models by myself. It should work, but each new release should be considered as "untested" until the contrary is reported. Still interested...? The source files and ready-to-use binary files for several variants of Ultimaker 2 and 2+ machines are hosted on GitHub. Just download the appropriate hex-file for your printer and store it on a local drive. The file names should be pretty much self-explanatory: https://github.com/TinkerGnome/Ultimaker2Marlin/releases The hex-file can be installed on the printer with the assistance of Cura. If you own an Ultimaker, you probably have already installed it. If not, you can download the current version of Cura from the Ultimaker site: https://ultimaker.com/en/products/cura-software Within Cura 2.3.x. choose from the menu: "Settings" -> "Printer" -> "Manage Printers" Take care that the active printer is the one that you want to use for the firmware update and connect printer and computer with the USB cable. Click on the button "Upgrade Firmware" and choose the option "Upload custom firmware". Where to get help? There's not much documentation for this alternative firmware yet. Just explore the menu structure on your own... If you have further questions you should ask for assistance on the Ultimaker forum. There are many active and cooperative community members. Please use the original topic from the link below for questions, suggestions and discussion. That helps to keep everything in one place. https://ultimaker.com/en/community/7436-more-information-during-print You can even join the team and contribute by yourself, just offer your skills and ideas there. If you notice a specific issue, you can also report it on the GitHub page: https://github.com/TinkerGnome/Ultimaker2Marlin/issues Have a good time!
  19. 10 points
    Here's my entry in the contest, as the Netherlands are big in Logistics I decided to design a set of material handling equipment (MHE) I made 7 vehicle types, each with a variety in loads to carry, making a total of 22 unique pieces. Looking from top to bottom; NAT ; narrow aisle truck (man up) FLT-2T ; 2 ton electro forklift RT ; 1.6 ton Reachtruck OPT: orderpicktruck with 3 rolcages Tow ; Towtruck FLT-4t-; 4Ton Gas powered forklift FLT_10T ; 10Ton diesel forklift Print the files as they are, laying flat, I printed them quickly in PLA, using a 0.4 nozzle and 0.15 layer. You can find all files here on YouMagine, including a step file so you can make any changes in most CAD software, if you make any new variants please share them back.... https://www.youmagine.com/designs/material-handling-equipment-scale-1-100-architect-design-contest-vehicles and to promote the contest a bit I also uploaded here; https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:2975986
  20. 10 points
    I been testing for almost two months a different bed glass called Neoceram as an alternative to the UM bed glass, so here they some my impressions and 'why'. Neoceram is a Ceramic infused glass made by a Japan company. Is a glass designed to withstand up to 800C heat impact. Why it can do that? That's one of the interesting things. The Neoceram glass doesn't 'Expand' when it heats up, it doesn't change of shape when heating up, so it doesn't break, chip, or get damaged by heating/cooling. A video is worth a thousand words right? Well this guys sell this for Fireplaces, so yea it can hold heat. Why is this interesting for a 3Dprinter? - Glass wont change shape when heating. So even without PID on the bed, the print won't suffer from changes of temperature (All umo, um2, um2+ without Tinkergnome firmware work on a Bang Bang Mode for the Bed) The other advantage is that it doesn't loose structural integrity when used, because Tempered Glass looses strength when heating/cooling due glass expanding/contracting. Neoceram Glass, specially on the range we use, has a expansion close to zero, so even at 120C the shape would remain the same. (OFC the print might compress when cooling down, because Plastics do compress) I have used this glass only with PLA and GreenTec, Recreus Filaflex and other flexibles. There's a clear improvement on adhesion strength, but the improvement isn't enough to replace hairspray, at first it did seem like it was enough, but isn't. It grabs better, but it doesn't replace hairspray for adhesion when using materials like GreenTec. But, for flexibles it did improve the adhesion. Why the fast cooling is interesting? Very easy. You can get your hot plate at 100C (with gloves doh!) and put it under a water, freezer, etc. Just after print has finish. Making the slow down of waiting it to cooldown close to nothing. With UM Tempered Glass I have damaged 3 glasses on this last 6 months now that I use Greentec + Hairpsray + Fast cooling at 60C to remove the print parts faster. Is the only way to keep the production cost down for me (speed). So I been using this Neoceram glass on two printers for this 2 months and I been pushing the limits of what you shouldn't do every day. And this are my impressions (but remember I'm no engineer, I just hack & chop and test everything I find) - Temperature is more stable along the print bed when using Neoceram. - The Gloss side has a almost invisible, but is there, 'Frosted' texture, so that's how the back of the prints look, but ofc it leaves a shiny gloss look. - Is Cheaper than UM Tempered Glass. - Not even a scratch after many forced pulls to remove them (to test it). - Is REALLY flat. So, how flat it is... That's a good question. The long history I did search for a few days for this glass. There's a 3D printer on USA that uses neoceram glass, but they sell the bed glass for an absurd 70-80€. So after many google hours, I did find one where the price was ok (because most of the places I found the lowest price was around 40-70€) The shop where I bough mine cristalamedida.com (I did pay for my stuff and they didn't give any part free and I also don't have any deal with them) allows to cut the size custom, so it was around 25€ each glass. So after getting the glass and testing it for weeks, I did contact the shop to know more, and surprisingly they where very very nice and did explain quite a few things about, why this Ceramic Glass is better than Tempered Glass. Tempered Glass is made on a Tin Bath (like @tomnagel said on a post long ago). So I asked this guys about that, and the guy Sergio from Cristalamedida did send me a mail with all the info about why the 4mm Tempered glass are how they are. Sergio told me that So well, just get a Caliper and measure your bed glass. The other issue he told me is that since Tempered Glass is cool down on tin bath, the cooling ratio allows the glass to suffer some degree of curvature. Making our bed glasses less flat. And about how flat UM bed glasses are ATM: This is the 'check' I did after buying 3 Glasses to the UM distributor in Spain I could clearly see that they where 'Banana' more than flat... Fortunately UM distributor is awesome (kudos for Tr3sdland) and I was able to return the bed glass (after send the video and explaining my concern ofc). And that 3 UM bed glass where 100€ with delivery. So, how flat is the 2 Neoceram Glasses I bough? Really really really reaaaaaally flat. Does that mean that yours will be? Dunno I don't sell glass ! So... I did ask Sergio again about the Specifications of the Neoceram Glass they sell, you know the PDF info about Flatness, heat resistance, all the info one gets when buys a product (the kind of Info UM doesn't offer when he sells a bed glass, because well is their right not to offer details of where the bearings, glass, etc etc come...) So this guys did send me the PDF of the brand they use for the Neoceram glass they sell: - I have upload the file to my dropbox so anyone can read it The flatness Neoceram glass gives is of a Flatness ≤ 0.3% × D So.. 0.3% for a 4mm, now we move on a 3.98 to 4.012mm range? Well officially this Cristalamedida guys they sell it as 1.0mm +-, but ofc that's to be safe from people with calipers like us. I was worried when I bough it but I can't be happier with my Neoceram glasses. So... Remember this is my own opinion, based on how I work day after day.
  21. 10 points
    Gudo agreed on sharing this early beta designs. As soon I get more time I'll upload the um2hotend Beta (NO INSTRUCTIONS FOR NOW) if someone is brave enough to use the ZGE with Mark 2. It uses a 4dia 3mm depth magnets and it uses 31 for a full 2 head setup. So, isn't assembly friendly but the design really rocks. So, for now just photos. Oh also UM3 Core version for um2 zgemark2, Gudo is testing it just now the first designs. It will only need 2 fans for the print cooling but each head will have his 5v fan. The fans are very easy to assemble or remove and every part is modular. The clip system uses a 'spring-magnet' system, that so far looks amazing but need's testing. Also the print precision will be really crucial on the clip system. Also Gudo moved the bed, by changing the screw points, this gives a 1cm area for the hotends to rest, so they don't need to rampup/rampdown while park/unpark. Also the magnet clip system allows for smooth removal to avoid any misstep lost or shift on movement forces. I'll share more when I know more I have printed a full version but my reseller doesn't have um2 3 aluminium parts in stock so I'm waiting for other source arrival to start assembling it. @Gudo will post more about this soon. Also since the files are on my dropbox, if anyone wants to beta test, PM me with your email so I give you read access. Edit. At the moment I can’t test this, I have all printed, but my agenda is getting fill of stuff to test and work.
  22. 10 points
    Hi to all ! Thank you neotko for the introduction, also thanks for the support and help of the entire Mark2 team, sorry for not mention all the names, you will easily recognize. As you can see, the goal was to adapt the ZGE DD extruder to the Mark2 magnetic tool change, for reasons of room in order to install a Dual ZGE, it was necessary to review and modify the Mark2 magnetic tool change system , print heads and routing while respecting as closely as possible the the Original Mark2 operations. It was necessary to install a second docking holder mirrored with the front right docking at the printer's left front, which necessitated modifying the magnetic tool change routing while retaining the possibility of exploiting the Mark2 firmware in almost its totality. This firmware tool change modification was realized, as usual with great success by Tinkergnome that I will never thank enough! In order for the ZGE use, to retain the print head and to ensure a very sure clamping of it , a magnetic locking/unlocking lever system has been set up, the lever exploits the magnets force more as springs to stay mechanicaly in locking position, it’s impossible to remove the head without turning by hand or by the unlocker docking key the head locking lever, so the magnetic tool change, while staying very smooth, needs much less force to dock/undock with no risk of motor micro misstepping issues or anything else. Also the fact of being able to dock the 2 heads, it has been logical to provide to that a single common cooling unit which stays attached to the gantry. This has given some advantages such as, less loss of print aera and the same weight is always supported by the gantry, a same print speed could be set if the materials are identical to the 2 print heads…, Print head Offset at less 0.5 mm tolerance X : +/- 18mm Y : +/- 0mm Z : +/- 0mm For all the rest the dual mode settings and operations are completely similar to the original Mark2 The result is quite satisfying, the Foehnsturm magnetic tool change really opens very interesting prospects and also for future the use possibilities of tools other than the FDM print head. Sorry for having not made the system with the wellknown UM2 hot end, as I got 2 UM3cores thanks to neotko ,I was very curious to tested them, contrary to all the uncertainties, I can say that it works wonderfully ! . Anyway any decent hot end could work with the system under condition to make the appropriate hot end holder adaptation.
  23. 10 points
    My name is Ruben, I'm a 26 year old software developer working at Cura. I've been at Ultimaker for 3 years. My day-to-day task consists of processing bug reports, fixing bugs and developing new features for Cura. I like to think of myself as the one guy that knows about all components of Cura: Front-end, back-end, translations, profiles, etc. Basically being very broad. Nowadays I'm not the only one any more that knows both front-end and back-end, but I'm still quite knowledgable about Cura and the go-to guy for a lot of colleagues. I'm quite an idealist when it comes to open source software, and a champion of keeping Cura open. So I'm doing the best I can to keep the process open, keep Cura usable for the whole of the 3D printing community, and involve the community. The other influence I try to exert on Cura is to make it more stable (as opposed to featuritis) through automating tests and taking care of bug fixes. Aside from work I like to play bass guitar, write subtitles for films and of course to program. I'm afraid no music of mine has been published on the internet, but you can see my subtitles online and of course my hobby programming projects, though I'm afraid that I tend to not finish most of those.
  24. 10 points
    quick update on the "CORE HEAD" decided to improve the electronics connector mounting, so I made a tiny pcb on my shapeoko, using a small engraving cutter. Finally also made the aluminium bottom plate, cut the main shape on the shapeoko, drilled the 60 degree center hole, and manually made the needed chamfers. Not the most accurate process but ok for now. Mounted the whole thing, did 2 prints, big improvement, think I nailed it this time. Used fuzzy skin in this print, don't really like the looks on this model but the print is fine imho.
  25. 9 points
    I just finished this. It was a multi-part print for ease of painting. Some of it I am not sure what happened...but hey, it is purty....And, I am unanimous in that ? Test Render Parts Finished piece
  26. 9 points

    Version 1.0

    9,687 downloads

    The original dodecahedral kinetic sculpture by Stijn van der Linden a.k.a. Virtox. Made of five nested dodecahedra, each one is limited to rotate around its own axis. It was printed with dual extrusion on an Ultimaker 3 with water-soluble PVA support material.
  27. 9 points
    I managed to go to Europe about a month ago. While there, I got sick....really sick. Sinus infection that had moved into my lungs as well. Bad enough so that I am about to start my second round of antibiotics to fully wipe this out. That is what I get for treating the symptoms instead of the infection for the last year. Yes, I thought things were fine with just my antihistamines. Well...nope..... The upside? It hit me so hard and fast that I barely smoked two cigarettes when I got there it hurt so badly, and today makes 1 month of no smoking. And, just to let you know how bad I was, I have had no desire to smoke since. So, after being a complete addict on smoking.....no shame in that since it is truly addictive, I have been smoke free for one month and ready to continue being smoke free. Even when the habit part starts in (not the addiction, but the actual habitual rituals of smoking...after eating, etc.) it lasts for about 2 seconds and is gone quite easily. I have never been so happy to have gotten that sick in my live. LOL Probably good for the printers too, eh?
  28. 9 points
    ZGE Authors - ZGE Idea and design & development by Charly - @Gudo - Crazy Ideas and ZGE Logo by Sebas - @Neotko General FAQ Can I use other bearings? NO. There's much math and simulations and beta testing on all the parts, if you fell like changing something just to save a buck, then this isn't the extruder for you, sorry! Can I use a shorter square rod? NO. I did bang Gudo with this many times, he is just so patient and explained me over and over how and why it can't. Basically that's the correct size for a umo/um2. Can you use 400 instead of 390mm, yea you can. But 390mm is the perfect length so it doesn't pick an eye while moving or hits you, and also is the length that allows the slider part to have always full contact with the square rod. So, like I said before, file the tip, because metal can hurt. (It never ever happened to me and I do look at the printer like a mad men when printing to debug stuff). Could I move the holder to the other corner? Yes, print it mirroed (that's something I did ask at the beginning, but after using it on the Left side I would not change it, it just make's sense... Hard to explain.. Can I use a cheaper drivegear? NO (well you actually could if you redesign most of the stuff, but if you just want to extrude without quality you can do it by hand ) Can I just print it on ABS or PLA, or China cheap PLA? NO. ABS for example size changes a lot, it can't get as much flex torsion without deforming as platec/greentec. Ofc if you thing you can, just do it, but don't come here asking why it fails Also the material used must be as precise as possible, that something that only good brands give. You wan't to have as many things under- control as possible when printing printing this with a bowden since the tolerances are quite hard. Short answer, we recommend Greentec / Platec for hightemp and strength. - Could I avoid to print the Flexible material parts? Oh yes, I forgot, there are parts that actually need to be printed on flexible materials like ninjaflex, recreus and a semiflex material. WHY? Just because (will explain all this on the video/tutorial). Most of them you can actually print them after installing the system, but also, well you can print them one by one very slow until you get the zge working - Why the motor holder moves a bit when printing? Because the system compensates the extrusion forces to avoid as much motion transmission to the printhead. Also, better the motor holder than the printhead, right? - I have a dual printer, I wan't to use this!? That's actually doable, Gudo even made a design that could work on a UM3. But... More or that someday. Basically we don't want to just make stuff that could work, but stuff that actually put something interesting on the table. There are many factors beyond making the extruder work on a um3 than just making it. Gudo actually I think did cover all of them, but then there's the part of the firmware. The UM3 firmware need's quite a lot knowhow to actually change parameters like Extrusion retraction while changing tools, prime amount, retraction amount, esteps, etc etc etc. So change this parameters on a um3 the user would need to know much knowhow to do stuff on linux without bricking the machine (editing stuff is really easy in the end but is a giant leap for most users). So for now we choose not to, but is there, if UM or maybe a modder makes a easy way to access the Machine Json files and edit them, then we might release it. Just because, it doesn't make sense to release stuff just for releasing stuff. Also, there's a big problemo for flexibles on um3, and that's the gap of air on top of the cores while they rest on the printhead.. So, could it work? Sure, but would it work everytime? That's the question... So, short answer, not yet. More FAQ And important points about ZGE Why we made it Gudo and Neotko are moving forward this extruder because we are always pursuing quality, speed and precision. Bowden is a lightweight solution that creates quite a number of handicaps, like for example hysteresis (filament compression due pressure) making it impossible to actually control the extrusion. With ZGE Direct Drive this is now posible, for 1.75mm filaments and 2.85mm, without any compromise on Extrusion horse power. Why don’t we sell it atm Gudo and I (Neotko) have other interest than just selling upgrades. Is a nice idea, but we been crunching numbers and isn’t something we would love to be doing on the short time. I have a business and is starting to work and it demands my full time (except weekends where I try to keep improving every bit of the printer). Also isn’t that easy, to make a comercial version of the ZGE would requiere most probably a mold, and that’s freaking expensive, delivery, stock, gudo making sliders, me printing all the other parts, and that could be a nice dream but we don’t have a 100 printers farm to do it right, and sincerely is great to not need to defend something that you want to 'sell' it keeps the mind objective and fresh to new ideas. So we have choose the YDIY (You Do It Yourself) path. I will make videos of how to print and assemble the key parts that requiere extreme love and care to do them right. Gudo I think can provide for some individuals the key parts, but don’t overwhelm him, if you don’t get one, you need to DIY. The good It freaking works, it extrudes beautifully, it keeps working and working and delivering repetition and amazing precision even with flexibles. Bondtech dualdrive has a lot on that, it could be done with a lesser quality extruder gear, but it would give troubles, bondtech does work and work and work. It grinds a bit, NO, it pushes the filament over and over (and we get Zero commission from bondtech on this!). The system moves a 390mm square shaft of 4mm square. This was the first challenge. I have been testing a 3x3 thinner rod and it works beautifully, but it will only be of use for 1.75mm guys. 1.75mm requieres less heat to extrude, less pressure, but also it has a drawback, it need’s more rotation on the drive gear, this means more stuff moving. That’s why a 3x3mm is better, because it delivers less noise to the weak um head (more on that latter) 2.85mm requieres more heat to extrude, more pressure but also has the advantage of less rotation on the drivegear, this means less noise translated to the printhead, but more force. So for this the best is a 4x4 square shaft. The Bad The punny UM2 hotend. We are using a hotend designed specifically for bowden, and bowden has one advantage, remove pressure and movement on the printhead, that’s why any single force done on the printhead (even a wooble bowden shacking) can add noise to the prints. And for the ZGE this means that every rotation on the drivegear can, since the head has very easy to bend and flexible shafts, translate tinny bits on Z noise. Does this Z noise is perceptible? Well, is hard to see, but is there, most users that don’t have a perfect Z might not notice this, but since I’m a crazy guy I did noticed it. The first version was much more dependent of a perfect square shaft. Gudo made an amazing improvement to this problem developing a printable UJoint system that allows to remove the imperfections of a inexpensive rod (more on this later). And just yesterday, I got an idea (star medal for me on this since I’m really proud) we changed a part to be printed on flexible material removing almost 50% of the noise and making the prints look even better. So... Does it print better than a Bowden? It freaking does. Does it has a bit more of noise on Z? Yes it does, sorry, that’s how things are. UM2 head, even the 8mm shafts can ‘bend’ and they keep wobbling making them very susceptible to Pressure from the drive-gears to the head. Every retract/extrude is a sudden move, that translates this sudden moves to the printhead. But with this last update the problem is hard to see, and most of normal users won’t ever see it. The Ugly To print a ZGE you need aprox 5h for the most delicate parts (slider+driveshaft) and they will need some post-processing. Add one hour of assembly for this part, that must be done with love and not by brute force. Also you do need a hightemperature material, like greentec, platec. Just because this part get’s heat from the bed, so if you print at 60, the air will get there to 35C, and that + extrusion forces = bends. The Extruder head also should be greentec, platec. Is a very amazing material (we also get zero commission on this), but need’s hairspray on the bed and brims, and cleaning. I made a good article about how to add custom brims to the support, read it, read it again, and use it. You need all the parts to be printed perfect. More than 50mm/s can ruin the print and will add time to manual cleaning, that is less reliable than a 3dprinter. You will need to calibrate your printer to the 0.02-0.03 closeness to the measures we will show as base. Just like Gudo and I did, we used one of the parts, print it and with a digital caliper of at least 2 decimal points, I did print the object 3 times, with different Horizontal Expansion values of -0.02 -0.03 -0.05. For me the winner was the 0.02. So as you can guess, the difference from printing it right or wrong is very very small. You need to keep that in mind for the main part of the ZGE, since is the most delicate part. First time I print one I did it horrible, and after printing 20-23 I thing I have enough practice to make a perfect ZGE slider+shaft. The rest of the parts, need screws, nothing hard to find. There are two types of heads, one is more compact but need’s some special small 4mm mini shafts. The other, is more complex to assemble and is based on my Neotko-FatIRobertI extruder. Gudo also added a tension selector (very cool) to have 3 basic positions easy interchangeable. But is much complex to print. Also is taller... That... Well, shorter means less vibrations, taller more vibrations... Yea there are many many factors that we have take into account before posting this. We still need to talk Gudo and I of what basic version we release. Most probably the slider, they key part, won’t have a step file release, but the others might, or not. The important is that all the parts will be easy to print, except the slider (the slider, as I said over and over here must be printed with love and finished more or less by hand). The Main key parts you will need to get to DIY. First of all, the square rod of 390mm, there are shops on ebay that cut on demand, but try to be ware that the tip you need to soft it (file it) for safety! You don’t want to loose an eye because you didn’t hear us out right? For precision square shafts (they call them Key Steel or Parallel Key) the max length we where able to find is 350mm (on misumi) so that means that it would not work. It need’s to be a minimum of 390mm. Gudo might be able to provide this to some users, but again, ask once, if he doesn’t answer he is busy doing something more interesting, don’t hammer it. And you will need to pay for it, you know, square shafts don’t grow on trees. A shorter smaller screw. You know the four screws that hold your hotend? Well, one must be shorter, like 4mm taller, you can ‘sew’ it yourself indeed. Again, not easy to find. Gudo is amazing and he made me a few with the first kits he made for me. I have a shop, I want to sell it! Contact Gudo for this, you two might get along and do some business. I personally would love to see this extruder on every printer out there. But mind one thing, no shortcuts, no china quality. If you thing you are decent, come talk with Gudo. I want it for my printer! Our dream is to have this on as many printers as possible, a Bowden-free world. If you are a 3d printer maker contact us and we will study making a version of our ZGE for your machine. But remember this is Open Source, so we will focus on Open Source machines like UM, BCN, and probably others. If we don’t support your printer, give us time, we are just two guys that love 3d printing and making our printers as precise as possible. Contact your printer company, if they give us access to your files we might do it! And ofc if you have a Solid Robust No Woobly printer, we are interested But ofc, Maybe Gudo just make's a better printer out of this UM.... But that's a history for other day List of things to do: - An assembly manual. Atm users that found IRobertI Feeder hard to assemble, should stay away from this, since this is probably 10x times harder and requieres much finesse to assemble and to print it. (sorry is just how it is) - Video of the ZGE SliderUjoint system. I need time to do it, but is on my todobedobedo list. Important before Downloading it - The zip has STEP and STL files - The STL files have TEXT that indicates the level of quality to print it, DO READ IT. Quality Levels are MIDQ - Medium Quality 50mm/s tops and 0.2mm layer is ok HIQ - High Quality 40-50mm/s is ok but no more than 0.1-0.15mm layer height HIQSLOW - Keycomponent 30-40mm/s max and 0.1-0.12mm layer height TEMP - Version printable in PLA or any material at hand that will need to be replaced with a FLEX later FLEX - Flexible material part. Print it after having the ZGE working (since is much easier). Recommeded Flexible material like NinjaFlex or Filaflex. Basically Very flexible. Did you read everything?, are you sure? Ok, you can download Zero Gravity Extruder at Youmagine by Gudo & Neotko Much still to write about how to print this, assemble and use it correctly. For now Check this OLD VIDEOS (REMEMBER THEY ARE OLD and they show OLD version assembly, but should give some hits to the pro users) Example of BAD SliderUjoint print Old post with a few print test videos and etc etc https://ultimaker.com/en/community/35608-zero-gravity-direct-drive-extruder
  29. 9 points
    Dear UltiSanta, I have been a good boy this year and would like to see the following things on an Ultimaker 4 system: Larger build volume because, well, I like big things and I cannot lie, other guys might deny, teeny weeny things can be done by every other thing..... Properly enclosed build area to remove heat issues on the whole. Smoother ops between firmware and software. While firmware accepts 'PLA' (or other various substrate) regardless of color or type Cura wants to choke on it requiring a manual override when printing even though all the settings are the same when you are slicing (unless you change them of course), So if you are using presets, does it really matter what color it is? A pausing function between prints to allow for cleaning ops as I change plates between each print A pausing function During prints to allow for cleaning ops as long prints can accumulate or cook hygroscopic materials and require cleaning An actual resume print after some sort of failure would be cool, especially on those long prints of days and days and it chokes at the last few hours And, finally, a dilithium crystal matter/antimatter mix chamber for off grid printing when Armageddon hits
  30. 9 points
    Hi, I'm BagelOrb a.k.a. the engine guy a.k.a. Tim a.k.a. that dude with the beard which is better than that of SandervG. I work on the inner workings of the slicing engine which actually generates the gcode from the 3D model data. This requires a lot of knowledge of both hardware and firmware and of course of Cura itself. In the next couple of years I will be researching slicing advanced geometry which goes beyond the scope of an STL: texture information, infill density heatmaps and similar 3-dimensionally defined data which cannot be captured in a surface mesh alone. In my free time I like turtles.
  31. 9 points
    Now, that the hero of my childhood has died, i´d like to show you this little diorama. I started some time ago, but i finished it today. All vehicles are printed with a 0.25 nozzle, the landscape with a 0.4 nozzle. Most of the parts are made in 3dsMax and Zbrush. I hope you like it and godspeed, Roger[/media]
  32. 9 points
    You, sir, are a coward. You rant and rave here, link us to your additional ranting and raving blog...and delete Nallath's well-crafted reply/comment on it. You like to make a lot of noise but can't stomach a response. Grow up.
  33. 8 points
  34. 8 points
    Ultimaker has a long history of working closely with our users, and this has worked out really well for both sides. A particularly involved and knowledgeable user group can be found right here, in our community of 3D printing experts. Someone who has been in the spotlight before because of his contributions is @Anders Olsson . If you think that name sounds familiar, you are probably thinking of the ‘Olsson Block’. The Olsson Block is a response to the hot end we developed for the Ultimaker 2 and was later officially integrated in the Ultimaker 2+. Anders didn't stop there and continued to develop a Ruby nozzle which is wear-resistant. Fast forward a few years later, and we have a Print Core CC Red. It was time I sat down with Anders again and talk about these ruby inserts. - Anders Olsson during the Olsson Block campaign. Q: Anders, who are you and how may people have heard about you? A: I work as a Research Engineer at Uppsala University and I am the inventor of the Olsson Block for the Ultimaker 2+ series. Some people might also have heard of me printing boron carbide (link) composites for nuclear shielding. (Boron carbide is an extremely hard boron-carbon ceramic which falls just behind cubic boron nitride and diamond as one of the hardest known materials). Q: With the Olsson Block you could swap nozzles within a few seconds. Why did you continue your research and develop a more expensive wear-resistant nozzle, when replacing a worn down nozzle is so fast and easy? A: For some materials that may have been sufficient, but Boron Carbide is so abrasive, a brass nozzle can easily be destroyed in less than one print. Secondly, we wanted to prevent brass-contamination in the printed material in case we wanted to recycle it. Q: How did a Ruby nozzle end up in a print core? A: There is a type of enriched boron carbide which has much better performance than natural Boron carbide but it’s also much more expensive. By using the expensive material only in areas where it is really needed one can make components which has much better performance without becoming extremely and unnecessarily expensive. 3D printing - dual extrusion gives us these options. We really liked the reliability of the print cores and the quickest way to bring that reliability and the wear-resistance we needed together, was to make a prototype of a print core with a modified block to fit an Olsson Ruby nozzle. - Print core CC Red shown at TCT show. Q: Can you explain why you chose Ruby in the first place from all available options? A: Ruby (Alumina/Corundum) is a great material. It is chemically stable, not toxic or dangerous if you somehow wear it down (which for example, Cemented Tungsten Carbide would be in our case). What you also have to look for is availability and consistency. Ruby was the hardest material that could reliably be sourced with the dimensions I wanted. A scale to quantify hardness is the ‘Knoop’ scale. To put Ruby in perspective of other materials with a Knoop value, Copper is 163, Ruby is 2100 and Diamond is 7000. There are not that many materials between Ruby and Diamond. Diamond was too expensive and not feasible as a solution. Q: While using a Print Core CC Red, have you experienced any downsides with printing non-abrasive materials? A: I personally haven’t seen any disadvantages using the Print Core CC Red for any materials. I’ve also tried other abrasive materials besides Boron Carbide which worked fine. Q: Why is the Print Core CC Red 0.6mm? A: Abrasive materials often have fibers in them for reinforcement. A 0.6mm diameter gives a good balance between printing speed and detail, while being large enough so it won’t clog due to the fibers some materials contain. Q: Can you quantify how long a Print Core CC Red should last while processing abrasive materials? A: So far we have not been able to detect any wear with any commercially available materials. We recently cut open a nozzle that had printed about 25kg of carbon fiber and it showed no measurable wear inside or on the Ruby. To put things in perspective; Brass nozzles will typically last: 0,3kg, Stainless nozzles: 1kg, Hardened steel: 3kg of common carbon filled materials before print quality will suffer badly. - On these photo’s you can see that abrasive material not only wears out the nozzle diameter, but also shaves the brass from the outside shoulders. There is an important side note though, before you might consider Ruby as indestructible: although it’s wear-resistant Ruby can also be fragile. A user should avoid hitting it with hard objects and avoid using a flame cleaning the nozzle, because brass easily deforms when overheated and quick temperature changes stresses the ruby. Q: For some readers, abrasive materials may be a new subject matter. Can you explain what it is that makes a material abrasive when you are not sure which print core to use? A: Materials which are hard in a solid piece (like metals, ceramics and carbon fibers) will generally also wear down the nozzle. In general one should assume that any filament with a filler will cause more wear on the nozzle, except if the filler is obviously much softer than brass (like wood). Example: Glow in the dark filament has a ceramic powder to make it glow. Which makes it abrasive. Q: What are you using the Print core CC Red for yourself at the moment? A: Apart from printing with Boron carbide, we’re now exploring other fillers which stops different types of radiation, which are magnetic, which are electrically conductive or which can be fired into a ceramic object after being printed. Part of the goal is to combine several properties in the same object in three dimensions, which can only really be done with a dual material printer like Ultimaker 3 or Ultimaker S5. None of these materials can reliably be printed without a Print core CC Red. -- And that concludes my interview with Anders Olsson. I hope this has been an interesting read and you have discovered something new about the Print core CC Red. Since Ultimaker products were never compatible with highly abrasive materials, how to work with them may be a new subject for some of you. If you have any further questions, please feel free to post them below! More questions about abrasive materials? We'll host an AMA (Ask Me Anything) soon with 2 experts of Owens Corning (the manufacturer of XSTRAND) on 31st of October. Mark it in your agenda ? And finally, in just a few weeks the print cores will be available at your local reseller. If you want to be kept up to date and receive an email when it becomes available, please follow the link below and be the first to get one! Keep me updated about the Print Core CC Red
  35. 8 points
    OK, so there's quite a discussion going on in the Cura 3.5 thread about quality control and testing of Cura (and related firmware, etc.) and I thought I would start this new thread to make a particular point and give people a place to discuss it and related matters. Here goes... For various reasons, the products UM make evolve. The hardware is fairly static (years) but the software is a much more dynamic thing (months). The software is continually getting enhanced with new features and capabilities, old bugs getting squashed, etc. Almost always, each release brings not only goodies but new bugs and incompatibilities with existing platforms and OSes. Obviously, each new release needs a lot of testing on all 3 supported platforms (with their various versions of OS and drivers, etc.) before it can be considered trustworthy. We know that UM do a lot of testing. They could probably do more but even if they did a lot more, it wouldn't catch every bug and issue. The problem space is too big with too many variables. So this is where the community of Cura users can step up and make a real difference. Hands up those of you who use Cura with a non-UM printer and never bother to try the beta that is made available before each release. [Quite a lot of people looking a bit sheepish out there.] Why not try it? Why not give something back to UM? I'm not talking about money. All it takes is a bit of disk space and some time to install the beta and try out slicing and (ideally) printing a few of your projects. If all looks good, fine, you've done your bit. If there's a problem, create an issue on github (or post on the forum) and that's even more valuable. Yes, the software (Cura) is free for everybody to use but if you're using it on a non-UM printer then you really should be helping with the beta testing because, at the end of the day, that helps everyone, yourself included. If you don't bother to try the beta and the new release doesn't work well for you, who's problem is that? Yours! Of course, it would be nice if those people who have purchased a UM printer could try the betas also if they possibly can but I don't feel that they are in anyway as obliged as the non-UM printer owners to do so. So to sum up, the Cura user community can make a huge difference to the quality of each Cura release. Why be a freeloader when you can be a valuable member of the community?
  36. 8 points
    This is something I've been working on for a while in between other projects. Only a specific sequence of steps will allow access to its secret compartment. Check out the YouTube video linked below to see it in action. Designed in Sketchup and printed on my UM3, it's made up of 36 individual pieces which snap together. I used a variety of filaments: Ultimaker Nylon, Transparent and Black Ultimaker ABS, Orange, Green and Gray Faberdashery PLA, True Lagoon and Glacier Blue YouTube Video, Project X
  37. 8 points
    We did a 9 day print recently on the Ultimaker S5. I love how this turned out. Admittedly, that tail is so fragile, I'm a little afraid to breathe whenever I walk by it. We've got the S5 set up on a custom rolling cart we built with some built in storage areas. The STL is here: https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:284409
  38. 8 points
    I got this switching mechanism idea already a year ago, but never took time to realize. Since I'm printing now a couple of months w/o any switching issue's, it's time to share this upgrade here on the forum. It's working with a simple cam-plate, which is moving both nozzles at the same time. The cam-plate is bi-stable, by using the existing (UM2) springs which also hold the teflon isolator in place. Benefits of this modification, besides enabling 2 material prints: Simple modification on the existing hardware Switching is done above bed clips, so no loss of additional print space Modification works both on UM2 and UM2+ Switching in action: Some prints:
  39. 8 points

    Version 1.0.0

    22 downloads

    1/40 Mosasaurus Nozzle : 0.4 Layer : 0.06
  40. 8 points
    Big announcement! [German version] [French version] [spanish version] Hold on to your seats. It is not every week I can make an announcement of this magnitude. In a few weeks time Ultimaker will migrate its forum to a new forum software, provided by IPboard. For some it may be a surprise, for others it may be a decision overdue. Nonetheless we are happy and confident that this is the best decision we could make to provide a healthy environment for our community and ensure a bright future. We are aiming to migrate mid-December and do the complete the migration in ~3 days. Some parts of the preparation are still in progress, so the exact date may change (if it would get too close to the holidays, we might decide to do it early January instead). In any case, we wanted to share this prospect with you ahead of time. Make sure to like or follow this topic, so you will be kept up to date about possible changes and there will be no unpleasant surprises. Migrating means there will be a period of time that the forum will unavailable for contributions. In order to migrate all content, we have to close it down, bundle everything and deploy it in our new environment. We are looking into keeping the forum available for searching but no new posts can be made. Or perhaps have a designated chatroom available to bridge this period. Obviously we try to mimic the existing forum as much as possible for a smooth transition, however it is inevitable some things will work and look a little bit different. We’ll do our best to make the introduction as easy as possible. Why IPboard? A little while back I invited some of the most active members of our community and Ultimaker to help test different types of forum software. Among others we tested vBulletin, phpBB, IPboard and we looked into Vanilla and Discourse. After some thorough testing it was pretty clear that IPboard won the comparison with a landslide. Why migrate to a new forum? There are a few different reasons why we think it is a good move to migrate to a new forum. For starters, there have been some bugs haunting the forums which have proven difficult to fix. Some of these bugs have been more intense than others, regardless, they boiled to a point where they (could) harm the user experience significantly. Obviously, that is the last thing anyone would ever want. Secondly, when we moved to our existing forum we had big ambitions to build a collaborative forum where users would gather and ignite projects together. For example, in the user tab you could look for users with certain skill set, to potentially invite to your project and many interesting projects would surface from our community. And indeed some have, the Mark 2 project being one of my favorite community projects. But we don’t feel that vision still matches with our community, with knowledge increasingly becoming more important. The Ultimaker 3D printers becoming more advanced, a better ‘out of the box’ experience will take over a lot of the questions originally asked in our community. At the same time, that is where it gets interesting! After the ‘out of the box’ experience and your first handful of prints, you want to go and explore what you can really do with 3D printing and the Ultimaker ecosystem. And that is where the community shines. We have so many product experts in our community, it is unbelievable. That is also where we want to focus on in the upcoming era, educating our community further. Of course, we need a healthy, cooperative and supporting software environment to do this in, so the migration is step 1. If there is anything you want to learn from us, make sure to let me know! Can be about CAD modeling, post-processing, materials. But more about this, in our new forum As always I’m curious to hear what you think. Make sure to follow this thread so you will be kept up to date when things get more clear further down the road.
  41. 8 points
    Option of a bigger build volume. New silent step control board with more smarts. Closed-loop stepper-motor control with step-loss compensation. Light weight direct drive. 5 extruders, system like the mark 2 with ability to have other attachments other then filament extruders. Enclosed with temp control. Smart filament sensor that can compensate drive slippage, detect run out etc. Failed print camera detection also to detect if head is out of position if a pulley has slipped. Failed print recovery. Auto part removal for production runs. Stiffer bed on ball screws. Light weight stiff gantry. Touch screen with a ton of options for adjusting on the fly or customising printer setup manually. (Options were less on um3 compared to um2 where it should have been more like tinkerware.) Nozzle tip cleaner on material change With ability to set tip clean intervals for single extruder prints. Hot swap spool changer for filament run out. Phone notifications on printer status. Probably missed a few things because I just woke up. And make all this cheap enough so i can afford a print wall .
  42. 8 points
    My name is Jaime, 27 years old. I currently work as a software developer for Cura, but have worked on Embedded (UM3 Firmware) and the UltiScanTastic®™, a structured light 3D scanner. I've started working for Ultimaker 5 years ago, which makes me the second software developer to be hired by UM (Daid being the first). I "suffer" from the same problem as Ruben; If you're with a company like Ultimaker for an extended period of time, you tend to become the generic problem solver. I'm usually involved in a lot of projects at a time, ranging from Intellectual property to in depth software engineering. As for hobbies; I play a lot of RPGS (Tabletop & LARP), which also includes a lot of crafting. I build my own costumes (cloth & leatherwork) and assorted props (I even made a fortune telling "haunted" robot).
  43. 8 points
    We have something very interesting We've made the UM2 firmware compatible with the UMO with RepRap Discount LCD. So It would be possible to do the Mark2 upgrade on the UMO with the TinkerGnome firmware! More info coming soon! A big thanks to LowiekVDS for rewriting the firmware.
  44. 8 points
    projet archi, tous les bardages bois imprimer sur um3. chaque barreaux fait 0.4mm de large sur 0.4 d'épaisseur.
  45. 8 points
    Ok, I'm not sure I can measure up with the previous post, but thought I would share my latest nevertheless. :-) My wife, since the beginning, sort of tolerates my adventure into 3d printing. Yesterday evening she mentioned something about upcoming GoT season 7. I jumped at the chance saying "well, why don't we print you a dragon?" She gave me a funny look (since I mainly print utilitarian stuff), but I introduced her to thingiverse... and an hour later, she came back with a model (drogon-from-game-of-thrones-6660 on myminifactory). She grumbled when I have put it in cura (print time 1day and change), so I resized to about 75%, print time 15h. Queued the model for printing in the morning. After coming back from work, I found my wife in a good mood. She kept on checking the printer during the day, liking the result. In the end, I, too, like the result quite a bit: (Printed with Swissfil gold, Cura 2.6, Fine setting, no support/adhesion, held on the bed with 3D Lac, no post processing) If only I could convince my phone to focus on the head.
  46. 8 points
    Dernier projet en date : 44 heures d'impression Petg / fc Nanovia Hauteur de couche 0.120 mm
  47. 8 points
    Gudo and I wanted to give an update on the status of the ZGE So, long read ahead! (but interesting) Why we made it Gudo and Neotko are moving forward this extruder because we are always pursuing quality, speed and precision. Bowden is a lightweight solution that creates quite a number of handicaps, like for example hysteresis (filament compression due pressure) making it impossible to actually control the extrusion. With ZGE Direct Drive this is now posible, for 1.75mm filaments and 2.85mm, without any compromise on Extrusion horse power. Why don’t we sell it atm Gudo and I (Neotko) have other interest than just selling upgrades. Is a nice idea, but we been crunching numbers and isn’t something we would love to be doing on the short time. I have a business and is starting to work and it demands my full time (except weekends where I try to keep improving every bit of the printer). Also isn’t that easy, to make a comercial version of the ZGE would requiere most probably a mold, and that’s freaking expensive, delivery, stock, gudo making sliders, me printing all the other parts, and that could be a nice dream but we don’t have a 100 printers farm to do it right, and sincerely is great to not need to defend something that you want to 'sell' it keeps the mind objective and fresh to new ideas. So we have choose the YDIY (You Do It Yourself) path. I will make videos of how to print and assemble the key parts that requiere extreme love and care to do them right. Gudo I think can provide for some individuals the key parts, but don’t overwhelm him, if you don’t get one, you need to DIY. The good the bad and the ugly The good It freaking works, it extrudes beautifully, it keeps working and working and delivering repetition and amazing precision even with flexibles. Bondtech dualdrive has a lot on that, it could be done with a lesser quality extruder gear, but it would give troubles, bondtech does work and work and work. It grinds a bit, NO, it pushes the filament over and over (and we get Zero commission from bondtech on this!). The system moves a 390mm square shaft of 4mm square. This was the first challenge. I have been testing a 3x3 thinner rod and it works beautifully, but it will only be of use for 1.75mm guys. 1.75mm requieres less heat to extrude, less pressure, but also it has a drawback, it need’s more rotation on the drive gear, this means more stuff moving. That’s why a 3x3mm is better, because it delivers less noise to the weak um head (more on that latter) 2.85mm requieres more heat to extrude, more pressure but also has the advantage of less rotation on the drivegear, this means less noise translated to the printhead, but more force. So for this the best is a 4x4 square shaft. The Bad The punny UM2 hotend. We are using a hotend designed specifically for bowden, and bowden has one advantage, remove pressure and movement on the printhead, that’s why any single force done on the printhead (even a wooble bowden shacking) can add noise to the prints. And for the ZGE this means that every rotation on the drivegear can, since the head has very easy to bend and flexible shafts, translate tinny bits on Z noise. Does this Z noise is perceptible? Well, is hard to see, but is there, most users that don’t have a perfect Z might not notice this, but since I’m a crazy guy I did noticed it. The first version was much more dependent of a perfect square shaft. Gudo made an amazing improvement to this problem developing a printable UJoint system that allows to remove the imperfections of a inexpensive rod (more on this later). And just yesterday, I got an idea (star medal for me on this since I’m really proud) we changed a part to be printed on flexible material removing almost 50% of the noise and making the prints look even better. So… Does it print better than a Bowden? It freaking does. Does it has a bit more of noise on Z? Yes it does, sorry, that’s how things are. UM2 head, even the 8mm shafts can ‘bend’ and they keep wobbling making them very susceptible to Pressure from the drive-gears to the head. Every retract/extrude is a sudden move, that translates this sudden moves to the printhead. But with this last update the problem is hard to see, and most of normal users won’t ever see it. The Ugly To print a ZGE you need aprox 5h for the most delicate parts (slider+driveshaft) and they will need some post-processing. Add one hour of assembly for this part, that must be done with love and not by brute force. Also you do need a hightemperature material, like greentec, platec. Just because this part get’s heat from the bed, so if you print at 60, the air will get there to 35C, and that + extrusion forces = bends. The Extruder head also should be greentec, platec. Is a very amazing material (we also get zero commission on this), but need’s hairspray on the bed and brims, and cleaning. I made a good article about how to add custom brims to the support, read it, read it again, and use it. You need all the parts to be printed perfect. More than 50mm/s can ruin the print and will add time to manual cleaning, that is less reliable than a 3dprinter. You will need to calibrate your printer to the 0.02-0.03 closeness to the measures we will show as base. Just like Gudo and I did, we used one of the parts, print it and with a digital caliper of at least 2 decimal points, I did print the object 3 times, with different Horizontal Expansion values of -0.02 -0.03 -0.05. For me the winner was the 0.02. So as you can guess, the difference from printing it right or wrong is very very small. You need to keep that in mind for the main part of the ZGE, since is the most delicate part. First time I print one I did it horrible, and after printing 20-23 I thing I have enough practice to make a perfect ZGE slider+shaft. The rest of the parts, need screws, nothing hard to find. There are two types of heads, one is more compact but need’s some special small 4mm mini shafts. The other, is more complex to assemble and is based on my Neotko-FatIRobertI extruder. Gudo also added a tension selector (very cool) to have 3 basic positions easy interchangeable. But is much complex to print. Also is taller… That… Well, shorter means less vibrations, taller more vibrations… Yea there are many many factors that we have take into account before posting this. We still need to talk Gudo and I of what basic version we release. Most probably the slider, they key part, won’t have a step file release, but the others might, or not. The important is that all the parts will be easy to print, except the slider (the slider, as I said over and over here must be printed with love and finished more or less by hand). The Main key parts you will need to get to DIY. First of all, the square rod of 390mm, there are shops on ebay that cut on demand, but try to be ware that the tip you need to soft it (file it) for safety! You don’t want to loose an eye because you didn’t hear us out right? For precision square shafts (they call them Key Steel or Parallel Key) the max length we where able to find is 350mm (on misumi) so that means that it would not work. It need’s to be a minimum of 390mm. Gudo might be able to provide this to some users, but again, ask once, if he doesn’t answer he is busy doing something more interesting, don’t hammer it. And you will need to pay for it, you know, square shafts don’t grow on trees. A shorter smaller screw. You know the four screws that hold your hotend? Well, one must be shorter, like 4mm taller, you can ‘sew’ it yourself indeed. Again, not easy to find. Gudo is amazing and he made me a few with the first kits he made for me. Bondtech Drive gears for 1.75 or 2.85 you need the 8mm shaft dia, with 4mm - 24-25mm long shaft for the mirror gear. Motor. I have use, and I keep using, the UMO motor without any geared solution. For 1.75 works perfectly. For 2.85 the best (until one of the beta testers install it and test the motor I sent) is a Bondtech 5.18:1 geared nema. It works and works. I have a shop, I want to sell it! Contact Gudo for this, you two might get along and do some business. I personally would love to see this extruder on every printer out there. But mind one thing, no shortcuts, no china quality. If you thing you are decent, come talk with Gudo. Where the BOM ? Soon, soon. Don’t worry. We have it on a txt file, we did it long ago, and it might need to get a few final touches. I want it for my printer! Our dream is to have this on as many printers as possible, a Bowden-free world. If you are a 3d printer maker contact us and we will study making a version of our ZGE for your machine. But remember this is Open Source, so we will focus on Open Source machines like UM, BCN, and probably others. If we don’t support your printer, give us time, we are just two guys that love 3d printing and making our printers as precise as possible. Contact your printer company, if they give us access to your files we might do it! And ofc if you have a Solid Robust No Woobly printer, we are interested 8)But ofc, Maybe Gudo just make's a better printer out of this UM.... But that's a history for other day So what now? Well, we will post the files soon. We need to short all the files, we had a lot of beta test, many iterations and now is time to arrange that. The following weeks I'll try to make some videos of how to assemble, deblur it, etc. What can work, what will give problems, where it need's to be smooth and where the play must be zero. A bad print of the Slider part (the thing that moves) just translates into more noise or backlash. So, more soon! (but give us a few days)
  48. 8 points
    We think we have it! While we are still testing to be a 100% sure internally. We've put this change up for installation already as the "Testing version" 3.6.3. The only change in this update is the fix for the USB always showing empty file list issue. There is still a 2nd issue, where it shows a empty file list on the first try, and a full list if you press return and open it again. We didn't fix that issue yet (We do know the cause, but due to the easy workaround of closing and opening the menu we didn't spend time on that a fix yet) The bug itself. Now. If you want to get technical. The cause here is... the glowing of the LED ring at the front of the printer when your print is finished. What? Yes. This ring is glowing by some code on our side, but the LED output is controlled by a linux driver. So we are talking to this driver. Due to changes in how we manage the LEDs, we are updating this LED more times per second then before. A bug in the LED subsystem of linux caused every write we did to this LED ring to cause 3 or 6 "udev" events. This is a general event system from linux for hardware changes. Hardware changes that include USB removal or insertion. Now, this LED glow was generating these events faster then they where handled. Creating a backlog. This backlog in turn caused the handler of these events to use a lot of system resources, at which point another system decides at some point that this handler is most likely misbehaving and needs to be restarted. Only increasing the amount work to be done instead of decreasing it. Why is this important? Well, because these events where never proper handled anymore, the USB drive removal was never properly handled, and the insertion was also not properly handled anymore. Causing the system to look for the "old" insertion of the USB stick instead of the new one. And thus not being able to read it, it shows no files at all (and the read error never bubbles up to our code) Currently we placed a tiny fix in the code to prevent these events, and nothing else. We already had plans to update our linux kernel towards a more stable version. But we didn't want to push out this kernel in a hurry just to fix this bug, at the risk of introducing a different (possibly larger) problem. This was one of those, you have to be kidding me right? bugs. Now, why didn't we catch this one during testing? We didn't catch it at the development team because we clean our printers pretty much as soon as they are done. Our printers get updates multiple times a day, and you need a lengthy session for this bug to happen. Our testing team switched to mainly network printing to better validate the Cura network printing at the time this bug was introduced. So they did notice it once or twice, but didn't get to notice the severity of the problem. And they also had a bad batch of USB drives before, which made them a bit less alert on USB problems and quicker to think "oh, bad USB drive". Why in the 3.6? Wait you might say! The LED ring was glowing before as well. Yes. It was. But the update was at a lower frequency, reducing the amount of events, giving the system more time to handle them. This change was introduced when cleaning up the LED control code during 3.6 development. Before this release the LED control code was pretty much the first prototype we made for this code. It functioned, but when we wanted to add the user configurable lighting, we also cleaned up this code. Introducing this unintentional bug in the process. The big thank you I want to thank you all for reporting this, and the people that helped in the diagnose both online and offline. It was a tough nut to crack, and really every tiny bit of information helped here.
  49. 8 points
    First test with Cura 2.4 and the current firmware release. No prime tower, no wiper, 0.8 nozzle on ext1, 0.4 on ext2.
  50. 8 points
    Finiii!!!! C'était chouette. Au prochain!
This leaderboard is set to Amsterdam/GMT+02:00
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to the Ultimaker Community of 3D printing experts. Visit the following links to read more about our Terms of Use or our Privacy Policy. Thank you!